ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Structural dynamic and buckling behaviour of steel

cold-formed polygonal conic pole for antennas support
Eduardo de Miranda Batista 1, João Alfredo de Lazzari 2, Gustavo Yoshio Matsubara1, Michèle Pfeil1

Correspondence Abstract

Prof. Eduardo de Miranda Batista
Civil Engineering Program
COPPE, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
C.P. 68506
21945-909 Rio de Janeiro, RJ
Brazil
batista@coc.ufrj.br
Support for antennas placed as high as 40-50m demands traditional trussed steel or pole towers,
the former with much larger base area than the later and the consequences for the costs of the
ground occupancy. This aspect is of upmost importance for both urban and rural areas and the
reason for the development of higher steel poles with polygonal cross-section, searching for
slender thin-walled structures. The present research focus is cold-formed steel conic twenty-
sided polygon solution allowing 40-50m high antenna support, for which one must deal with the
following challenges: (i) wind-induced dynamic behavior, (ii) buckling analysis, (iii) localized stress
concentration close to the openings along the pole, (iv) connection solution that strongly affects
the erection procedure and (v) the fatigue effect. Beyond these aspects, results of the dynamic
behavior, elastic buckling, nonlinear structural behavior until the collapse and design procedures
for the computation of the structural strength of the steel pole are presented and commented,
revealing the importance of structural analysis by combining tailored numerical tools as the finite
strip and the finite element methods, as well as frequency domain methods for smooth and
turbulent wind actions. Additional CFD and experimental wind tunnel results should be
considered for advanced structural design, as well as experimental structural analysis to confirm
the set of numerical results and the design procedures adopted for the steel polygonal poles.

Keywords

Antennas support system, Steel pole tower, Cold-formed steel structure, Wind-induced dynamic,
Buckling analysis

1 Introduction
Expansion of the internet and cell phone signals need the
installation of additional facilities, including support for antennas
placed as high as 40-50𝑚𝑚 in both urban and rural areas. Traditional
structural solutions are based on trussed or pole steel towers, the
former with much larger base area than the later and the
consequences for the costs of the ground occupancy. This aspect is
of upmost importance and the reason for the development of higher
steel poles with steel polygonal cross-section, searching for light
solution based on cold-formed thin-walled structures.
1. COPPE, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil.
2. CERIS, Instituto Superior Técnico, University of Lisbon,
Lisbon, Portugal.
The main results of the study for the improvement of 20-sided
polygonal conic steel cold-formed pole are presented, including a
40m high antennas support. The study was developed based on the
30m high reference design pole illustrated in Figure 1, originally
designed by BrasilSat Harald S/A company. For this, the cross-
section was taken with 1450 and 300𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 diameter at the bottom
and top, respectively, the steel plate thickness may be taken from
2.65 to 6.35𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚. The pole is composed with 6m length elements,
designed with slip joint or bolted flange connection. Furthermore,
the study included the presence of maintenance openings along the
pole, that must be reinforced to avoid premature localized collapse.
Finally, groups of antennas were considered at: (i) level 35𝑚𝑚:
3x(1.95x0.4m), 3x(0.36x0.26m), 1x(φ0.6m); (ii) level 40𝑚𝑚:
12x(1.96x0.25m) and 12x(0.36x0.26m). Drag coefficients for the
antennas are 1.2 for rectangular and 1.6 for circular shapes.
2 Wind-induced dynamic behavior and loading
Pole towers may exhibit dynamic behavior induced by wind
turbulence, interference effects and vortex-shedding. The present
analysis considers the 40𝑚𝑚 high isolated pole previously described
aiming to determine internal forces in ultimate limit state and
dynamic behavior under wind turbulence and vortex-shedding.
Openings
6m length typ. element
Base thick plate
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 1 Geometry of the reference 30𝑚𝑚 high, 20-sided conic steel cold-formed
pole for antennas support: (a) top and (b) bottom (base) at ground level, (c) typical
cross-section.
To determine the global vibration modes and associated
frequencies a numerical 3D stick model was developed considering
all masses (of the structure and the appendages) and the details that
affect the stiffness. The soil-foundation-structure interaction was
taken into account by representing the soil effect by Winkler springs
and establishing the rotational stiffness of the shallow foundation
while resting on a rigid clay soil. At the base of the numerical model
the foundation was represented by an infinitely rigid frame element
to which a moment spring is attached. Slip-joint type connections
were adopted between the pole steel modules at every 6𝑚𝑚. The
overlap lengths were determined by applying the safety criteria to
the design circumferential tension stress due to gravitational forces
and overturning moment at each connection. In the numerical model
a frame element with thicknesses of both the upper and lower
modules was inserted to represent each slip joint connection. The
modules plate thicknesses are the following: 6.35𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 for the
modules up to 18𝑚𝑚 above ground and 4.75𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 for the remaining
ones. The structural damping ratio was taken equal to 1%.
Free vibration analysis of the numerical model yielded the following
frequencies: 0.52𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻 for the first bending modes in orthogonal
vertical planes, 1.86𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻 for the second bending modes and 5.00𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻 for
the torsional mode.
The dynamic analyses under turbulent wind action were performed
in the frequency domain by means of the discrete model method,
based on the Davenport method and indicated by the Brazilian code
NBR6123:1988 [1]. The maximum generalized displacement
associated to a vibration mode is the sum of the mean and the
maximum fluctuating responses, where the latter is the product of
the standard deviation of the fluctuating displacement by the peak
factor 𝑔𝑔. Then the equivalent wind forces are determined and
statically applied to the numerical model to reproduce the dynamic
peak response.
For the ultimate limit state condition, the basic wind speed was
taken equal to 40𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠 at 10𝑚𝑚 above ground level in a flat and open
terrain. For this case, the Reynolds number associated to the cross-
section diameter along height varies in the range 1.0 𝑥𝑥 106 to
3.5 𝑥𝑥 106 . Based on results from the literature the drag coefficient
for the 20-sided polygonal section was taken equal to 0.8. The
bending moment at base of the tower due to drag forces resulted
equal to 1 982𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 while the moment due to lateral turbulence was
estimated as 432𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘. The resultant nominal bending moment is
equal to 2 028 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘. It was observed that the drag forces at the
antennas are responsible by 65% of this figure.
Analyses in terms of displacement at serviceability condition aim to
avoid improper behavior of the antennas as well as excessive noise
due to vibration, which may exceed public comfort criteria.
Considering 1-year return period the peak displacement was
estimated as 0.6𝑚𝑚. Fatigue analyses were not performed yet.
Vortex- shedding critical wind velocities were estimated on the
basis of Strouhal number equal to 0.18 as for a circular section
according to Eurocode 1, Part 4-2005 [2]: 1.4𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠, 7.8𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠 and
13.2𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠 respectively for the first three bending vibration modes.
Applying Ruscheweigh method [2] resulted very low vibration
amplitudes for the 3 modes, yielding to the conclusion that the
effects of vortex-shedding are not significant in the present case.
3 Structural buckling and nonlinear analysis
3.1 Elastic buckling analysis
The elastic buckling analysis was performed with the 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 (Finite
Strip Computer Application [3]). The software was developed on the
basis of the Finite Strip Method formulation, with trigonometric
longitudinal functions in series. With assistance of the computer
application, the “signature curve” (buckling load vs. length of the
member, including the buckling mode shape in both 2D and 3D
illustration) is obtained, along with the identification of the critical
buckling modes.
The 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹-based elastic buckling analysis was performed
considering: (i) polygonal tubular section, with number of sides,
thickness 𝑡𝑡 and diameter 𝐷𝐷 as varying parameters, and discretized
with at least 2 internal nodal lines for each polygonal face, (ii) the
material is steel with Young modulus 𝐸𝐸 = 200 𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺, Poisson ratio
𝜐𝜐 = 0.3 and shear modulus 𝐺𝐺 = 76.92 𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺, (iii) the loading is a
uniform linear stress distribution performing the pure bending
condition, (iv) the boundary condition is simply support, (v) only the
first longitudinal buckling mode term of one half-wave, (vi) the
length of the structural member is varied from 10 to 106 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚, with
100 intermediate values in log scale and (vii) the numerical solution
is linear elastic, based on the finite strip method with trigonometric
longitudinal functions [3].
For the present buckling sensibility analysis, the main parameters
are the diameter 𝐷𝐷 of the polygonal cross-section (measured by the
mid line of the wall between opposed vertexes of the polygonal
section) and the thickness 𝑡𝑡. Since the polygonal pole member has a
conic geometry, the diameter is not uniform along the height of the
support and the finite strip method is only able to solve constant
cross-section members, the effect of the conicity will be presented
later with the help of the finite element method.
Figure 2 illustrates the signature curves, as well the buckling modes
of 20-sided polygonal shapes, with diameter 𝐷𝐷 ranging from 300 to
1450 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 and thickness 𝑡𝑡 = 6.35 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 (𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 ratio from 47 to 228). The
𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 elastic buckling analysis is also compared to a 𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺 [4]
solution for 𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 = 228, showing accurate comparison as can be
observed in Figure 2.
 finite element software, ANSYS [5], by means of the parametric
design language (APDL), for parametrization purposes of the model.
6…
1.E+05 𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭 𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺
6… With respect to the numerical model, it should be pointed out the
following conditions: (i) the finite element discretization is based on
the SHELL181 (4-node, with 6 degrees of freedom per node), with
quadrilateral shape 30𝑥𝑥30 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 (the mesh discretization proved to
1.E+04 be accurate, after testing different FE dimensions); (ii) the applied
Mcr (kN.m)

loading reproduces bending moment linear stress distribution along

the polygonal cross-section shape, with the same maximum stress
value in the extreme compressive fiber in both end sections; (iii) the
GBTul D=1450, t=6.35, D/t=228
1.E+03 D=1450, t=6.35, D/t=228 boundary condition enables fixed 10𝑡𝑡 thick end-plates (fully
D=1220, t=6.35, D/t=192 restrained displacements in the plane of the end-plates, as well as
D=990, t=6.35, D/t=156
D=760, t=6.35, D/t=120 for both torsional and bending rotations of the pole member; (iv) the
D=530, t=6.35, D/t=83 type of analysis consists of physical and geometrical nonlinear
D=300, t=6.35, D/t=47
1.E+02 analysis by “The modified Riks method’” [6] with mixed
1.E+01 1.E+02 1.E+03 1.E+04 1.E+05 1.E+06 displacement and load control, which is based on the arch-length
L (mm) method; (v) the initial geometric imperfection is retrieved from a
Figure 2 Signature curve given by 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 [3] of a polygonal tubular section with 20- previous FEM elastic buckling analysis that updates the original
sided, under pure bending and considering different 𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 ratios, compared to the geometry with a deformed shape as the first critical buckling mode,
GBTul solution for 𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 = 228. amplified by 0.1𝑡𝑡; (vi) the material model is based on a bilinear
model, with isotropic hardening (elastic-perfectly plastic model),
In order to identify the buckling modes as a function of the diameter-
with consideration of the von Mises yield criteria and isotropic work
thickness ratio (𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡), 40 increments of diameter 𝐷𝐷 and 6 increments
hardening presumption (residual stresses due to cold forming and
in thickness (240 different geometries) were considered, varying
welding are neglected [7]; (vii) the modification of the mechanical
from 300 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 to 1450 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 (in diameter) and 2.65 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 to 6.35 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 (in
properties of the steel due to cold work in the bent corners are not
thickness). This choice of data is based on the 40 𝑚𝑚 height conic pole
considered; (viii) the round geometry of the corners are not
with 𝐷𝐷𝑏𝑏 = 1450 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 and 𝐷𝐷𝑡𝑡 = 300 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚, diameters at the base and
considered and straight corners are taken [8]; (vii) the full geometry
top, respectively, with ratio of variation of the diameter along the
of the model has a conic format, with different diameters in both
height (conicity) equal to 28.75 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚/𝑚𝑚. Finally, the present buckling
extremities and constant diameter-over-height ratio (conicity) of
modes classification was done based on visual inspection of the
28.75 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚/𝑚𝑚. The model description is illustrated in Figure 4.
𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 results. Examples of the elastic buckling modes obtained with
the 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 analysis are illustrated in Figures 2 and 3.

𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅

(f)
(g)

(i) (ii) (iii)

(d)
Figure 3 Elastic buckling modes associated to (i) distortional (𝐷𝐷 = 415𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚, 𝑡𝑡 =
4.75𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 and 𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 = 87), (ii) local-distortional (𝐷𝐷 = 472𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚, 𝑡𝑡 = 3.75𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 and 𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 =
126) (iii) local mode (𝐷𝐷 = 1220𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚, 𝑡𝑡 = 3.00𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 and 𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 = 407).
(a)
Table 1 shows the 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 results of the diameter-thickness 𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 ratio
range for each elastic buckling mode: (i) distortional 𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 < 120, (ii)
local-distortional 120 < 𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 < 170 and (iii) local 𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 > 170.
Case (ii) indicates a buckling mode that includes both geometric
shapes of local and distortional modes, a clear transition between L
and D buckling. (b) (e)
𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 = 𝜓𝜓𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅
Table 1 Results of the 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 analysis for the buckling mode classification based on
(c)
the diameter - thickness ratio (𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡), considered a 20-sided polygonal section.

Elastic Buckling Mode
(i) Distortional
(ii) Local-Distortional
(iii) Local
𝑫𝑫/𝒕𝒕 range Figure 4 Finite Element Model description: (a) shell element mesh and thickness
on the top fixed-ended end (smaller diameter); (b) boundary condition and loading
𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 < 120
at the top end; (c) boundary constrains and loading distribution along the top end;
120 < 𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 < 170 (d) 20-sided polygonal conic pole model; (e) quadrilateral shell element mesh in
the walls; (f) boundary constrains and loading distribution along the base end; (g)
𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 > 170 restriction to axial direction displacements, boundary condition and loading on
the base fixed-end.

3.2 Finite element analysis The conic polygonal pole support for antennas is mainly affected by
the wind loads, combined with negligeable gravity loading
The FEM (finite element method) analysis is a physical and contribution. In this condition, the bending moment is the main
geometrical nonlinear analysis. The analysis is carried out by the effect which conducts to typical bending moment stress
distribution. Considering the high computational cost performing
shell FEM for the complete 40 𝑚𝑚 high pole, it was decided to take the
6 m length of the bottom end of the pole as a representative portion
for FEM analysis. In addition, the manufacture and erection
procedure of the original structural design, which was taken as the
reference for the present investigation, is based on 6 𝑚𝑚 length
elements of the pole, with slip joint or flange connection system. In
order to obtain parametric results of the FEM analysis, the effect of
the lateral wind loading was conceived by linear stress distribution
at the cross-section ends, with the same maximum compressive
stress at the extreme fibers of the bottom and top end section. The
adopted procedure conducts to constant maximum stress along the
pole length, which can be considered an acceptable (conservative)
choice for structural analysis and design.
This assumption defines the end sections loading ratio 𝜓𝜓 = 𝑆𝑆𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 /𝑆𝑆𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 ,
where 𝑆𝑆𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 and 𝑆𝑆𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 are respectively the elastic section modulus of the
top diameter (minor diameter) and base diameter (major diameter).
For instance, considering a base diameter 𝐷𝐷𝑏𝑏 = 1450 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 and top
diameter 𝐷𝐷𝑡𝑡 = 1278 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 of a pole member with 6 𝑚𝑚 length and
thickness 𝑡𝑡 = 6.35 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚, the applied bending moments are 𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 in
the base and 𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 = 𝜓𝜓𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 in the top section, with 𝜓𝜓 = 0.78.
The comparison between the results of the elastic buckling analysis
from (i) the 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 computation, which takes constant diameter 𝐷𝐷 =
1450 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 and (ii) the cited FEM model also with constant diameter
𝐷𝐷 = 1450 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚, indicating that the former is in close agreement with
the latter, as can be observed in Figure 5: the critical buckling
bending moment (𝑀𝑀𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ) ratio between 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 and FEM analysis is
1488/1484 = 1.003. Additional results for different geometries of
diameters 𝐷𝐷𝑡𝑡 and 𝐷𝐷𝑏𝑏 , thickness 𝑡𝑡 and respecting the conicity of
28.75 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚/𝑚𝑚, confirmed the buckling analysis from 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 with
constant diameter is accurate enough to be considered for
structural analysis and design.
𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 = 1488 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘. 𝑚𝑚 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 = 1484 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘. 𝑚𝑚
(ii)
(i)
Figure 5 Comparison of the elastic bending buckling analysis results for a 4 𝑚𝑚
length, 6.00 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 thickness and constant diameter 𝐷𝐷 = 1450 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 of a 10-sided
polygonal member, given by (i) finite strip method with 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 [3] and (ii) finite
element method with ANSYS.
4 Effect of the openings
Openings along the pole are needed for cables passage,
maintenance and inspection. The structural consequences of the
presence these windows bring attention to unavoidable stress
concentration which induces strength weakening for both (i) static
loading condition and (ii) fatigue life under vibration scenario
induced by the wind-dynamic behavior.
In order to analyze the effect of the openings in the 40 𝑚𝑚 high, 20-
sided steel cold-formed polygonal section, base and top diameters
respectively 1450 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 and 300 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 and 6.35 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 thick steel plate,
the referred FEM model was adopted for geometric and material
nonlinear analysis. The obtained results are presented in the
following, including several types of opening reinforcements. For
this issue, static analysis was performed including the loading
amplification due to the wind-dynamic induced behavior (fatigue
consideration is not taken in the present study).
4.1 Geometry and reinforcement of the openings
The first consideration that must be addressed for the openings are
their global dimensions. The openings are placed in predefined
ground level (height) and faces, according to possible needs for
cables maintenance. Figure 6 shows details of the current
dimensions adopted in the present study, always based on the
referred original pole design example. The FEM model of the 20-
sided polygonal cold-formed steel conic pole was taken with 6 meter
in height, base diameter of 1450 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚, top diameter of 1278 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚,
6.35 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 thick, with 𝐸𝐸 = 200 𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺 of elastic modulus, Poisson ratio
𝜐𝜐 = 0.3 and 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 = 350 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 of yield stress.
𝐷𝐷𝑡𝑡 = 1.278 𝑚𝑚
(3)
6 𝑚𝑚
4.91𝑚𝑚
(2)
(1)
0.40 𝑚𝑚
1 𝑚𝑚
𝐷𝐷𝑏𝑏 = 1.450 𝑚𝑚
Figure 6 Detail of the distribution of rectangular openings (1) and (2) next to the
base of the antenna support, and openings (3) next to the top of the support, with
a frame reinforcement with angles L 63.4 x 7.94 mm (L2.5”x5/16”), according with
the referred original pole design example illustrated at the left.
The openings are placed next to the base (4 openings) and next to
the top (4 openings). The openings are defined in 3 different
classifications: (1) 2 diametrically opposed openings with 0.4 𝑚𝑚 from
the base, (2) 2 diametrically opposed openings with 1.0 𝑚𝑚 from the
base and (3) 4 openings displayed each 90 degrees, with 4.91 𝑚𝑚 from
the base. The opening’s configuration is displayed in Figure 6.
The bending moment loading cases were defined in order to achieve
maximum stress in the openings position. For this, two bending
loadings were defined, producing maximum stress: (i) in the
openings (1) and (ii) in the openings (2), as referred in Figure 6.
Regarding the opening’s geometry and frame reinforcements, one
must note that the dimensions and reinforcements of the openings
(3) are the same in all the analysis: rectangular dimensions of 102.4
x 204.8 mm (4”x8”) and frame reinforcement with angles L 63.4 x
7.94 mm (L2.5”x5/16”). The openings (1) and (2) were set with
different geometric configurations as defined in Figure 7. The
dimensions for width of the opening in Figure 7, are related to the
opening (2), for the opening (1), the superior and inferior dimensions
for the widths are 222.9 mm and 225 mm, respectively, due to the
conicity effect.
The finite element model included the openings’ reinforcements in
frame condition, which means fully welded connection in its corners Table 2 FEM results of the flexural strength at the base considering openings (1)
as well as all along the contour of the pole steel plate. Also, the and (2) with the different frame stiffening. Reinforced openings (3) with L 63.4 x
7.94 mm (L2.5”x5/16”) are included in all the cases (exception for NO and NR).
effects of welding residual stresses are not considered in the
present analysis. Name 𝑴𝑴𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹,(𝟏𝟏) 𝑴𝑴𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹,(𝟐𝟐)
𝑴𝑴𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹,(𝟏𝟏) 𝑴𝑴𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹,(𝟐𝟐)
Figure Description*
(kN.m) (kN.m) /𝑴𝑴𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹,𝑵𝑵𝑵𝑵 /𝑴𝑴𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹,𝑵𝑵𝑵𝑵
4.2 FEM results including reinforced openings 7
- NO 3553 1.00 1.00
Table 2 shows the comparison between the flexural strength (no
safety factor design considered) at the base of the 20-sided pole (A) NR 2000 2038 0.56 0.57
without openings (NO), with openings and no reinforcement (NR) (B) RP 63.4 x 7.94 mm 2904 2540 0.82 0.71
and with reinforced openings according with the configurations
described in Figure 7. The table shows the results for the openings (C) L 63.4 x 7.94 mm 2822 2670 0.79 0.75
(1) and (2), according with Figure 6, respectively 𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅,(𝟏𝟏) and 𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅,(𝟐𝟐) . (D) SC 63.4 x 7.94 mm 2966 2611 0.83 0.73
Each of these results are obtained by changing the applied bending SC+RP 63.4 x 7.94
moment load, according with the cross-section axis crossing (E) 3124 2960 0.88 0.83
mm
openings (1) or (2). 𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅,𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 is related to the case of the pole with no *NO: no opening; NR: no reinforcement; RP: rectangular plate; L: angle
openings. section; SC: semi-circular; SC+RP: semi-circular plus rectangular plate.

The FEM results also indicate the flexural strength of the reinforced
220.3 mm*
220.3 mm* 220.3 mm* openings (1) are always higher than openings (2) and it must be
considered for the pole design, in order to establish the best
combination of the position (distance from the base) and type of
reinforcement.
474 mm
474 mm

474 mm

Additionally, among the studied stiffening options, the

reinforcement (E) presented the best structural performance. The
idea of reinforcement (E) came by the fact that the thickness of the
frame elements of the reinforcements (A) to (D) are limited by the
222.3 mm* 222.3 mm*
welding conditions to the 6.35 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 thin-walled pole section (thicker
222.3 mm* stiffening elements would oblige special welding condition, in order
(A) (B) (C) to control higher local deformations and residual stresses). In this
220.3 mm* 220.3 mm* way, the proposed geometry (E) might be a good option for the
openings submitted to higher bending moment condition.
71 mm
71 mm

Some of the failure configuration displayed in Figure 8 indicate large

distortion and torsional displacements of the frame reinforcing
474 mm

23 mm
474 mm

members. Improving the torsional stiffness of the frame sub-

structure would bring favorable effect and this could be achieved by
introducing closed-section configuration of the frame elements
71 mm

around the opening.

71 mm

222.3 mm*
222.3 mm*
(D)
(E)
Figure 7 Geometric dimensions of openings (1) and (2), considering the
reinforcements: (A) no reinforcement, (B) rectangular plate 63.4 x 7.94 mm; (C)
angle section reinforcement L 63.4 x 7.94 mm; (D) semi-circular corners with
rectangular plate 63.4 x 7.94 mm, (E) semi-circular corners with rectangular plate
plus rectangular plates in a smaller opening area (both reinforcements with
dimensions of 63.4 x 7.94 mm). * Because of the conicity, these dimensions are
based on the opening (2), placed 1.0 m from the base, therefore, for the openings
(1), placed 0.4 m from the base, the smaller and higher dimensions are: 222.9 mm
and 225 mm.
As expected, table 2 results confirm that the presence of openings
significantly reduces the flexural strength of the structure. Note
that with no reinforcement in the openings, the reduction of
strength, compared to the conic support with no openings, can reach
44% (case A.1). However, with adoption of reinforcements, the
strength reduction can be reduced up to 12% (case E.1). The
reduction in strength of the structure is caused mainly by the
presence of pronounced deformation in the region of significant
compressive stress concentration around the openings, which is
intensified by localized geometrical imperfections around the
reinforcements. The deformed shape together with von Mises
stress field associated to the failure modes can be seen in Figure 8,
for all the cases indicated in table 2.
5 Structural design safety
5.1 Design procedures for flexural strength of steel cold-formed
section (CFS)
Concerning the structural design procedures for the flexural
strength capacity of CFS polygonal conic pole, the codes considered
in the present study are: the Brazilian codes ABNT NBR
14762:2010 [9] and ABNT NBR 8800:2008 [10], the North
American standards AISI S100-16 [11], ANSI/AISC 360-16 [12],
ANSI/TIA-222-G-2005 [13] and ANSI/TIA-222-H-2018 [14], and
the Australian/New Zealand standard AS/NZS 4600:2018 [15].
Table 3 illustrates the guidelines for the flexural strength design
procedures from the referred standards.
The prescriptions of the Brazilian [9], North American [11] and
Australian/ New Zealand [15] standards for steel cold-formed thin-
walled structures are based on the Direct Strength Method (DSM)
proposed by Schafer and Peköz [16], following original theoretical
background from Hancock et al. [17], and are expressed by equation
(1). The DSM was calibrated for local, distortional and global
buckling modes, as well as for the case of local-global buckling
interaction. Based on large experimental results evidences, for the
case of steel thin-walled structures, the collapse configuration
includes negligeable plastic performance and, because of this, the
flexural strength is associated to the yield bending moment (𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 =
𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 , with 𝑆𝑆 as the elastic section modulus). Nevertheless, the DSM- 𝑍𝑍𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 , with 𝑍𝑍 as the plastic modulus of the section) for tubular circular
based rules in the referred codes [9,11,15] for the design of thin- section (CHS) and the buckling mode is associated to cylindrical shell
walled CFS does not cover neither CHS nor polygonal sections. structure, as described by Timoshenko and Gere [18].

The North American standard for antenna supporting structures

[13,14] includes design equations for polygonal cross-sections from
8 up to 18 sides. For polygonal sections with higher number of sides,
the standard recommends to take the tubular circular member
(CHS) equations. However, this procedure seems to be a
conservative approach for 20-sided polygonal cross-section.

5.2 Results for DSM flexural strength

(A.1) (A.2)
The unfactored flexural strength 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛 is first addressed in accordance
to the DSM as included in both North-American and Brazilian codes
[9,11]. The flexural strength was obtained as described in the
equation (1), with the critical buckling bending moments 𝑀𝑀𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 and
𝑀𝑀𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 , related to local (L) and distortional (D) modes, computed with
the help of 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 computational tool (remember the 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 buckling
analysis results of 20-sided polygonal section with constant
diameter showed negligeable difference with the conic pole results
(B.1) (B.2) reported by the FEM buckling analysis).

The same previous material of the pole structure was considered:

cold-formed steel with 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 = 350 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀, 𝐸𝐸 = 200 𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺 and Poisson
Ratio of 𝜐𝜐 = 0.3. The steel plate thickness range was 2.65, 3.00, 3.75,
4.25, 4.75 and 6.35 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚.

Table 4 illustrates the results of the ratio 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛 /𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 , where 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛 =
𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚(𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛,𝐿𝐿 , 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛,𝐷𝐷 ) is the predicted nominal flexural strength due to
local or distortional buckling mode and 𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 is the elastic yield
(C.1) (C.2) bending moment.

Table 4 –Parametric flexural strength (𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛 /𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 ), for different thickness along the
height of the 20-sided pole support, considering 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 = 350 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 and the design
guidelines given by the DSM in equation (1).

𝑴𝑴𝒏𝒏 /𝑴𝑴𝒚𝒚
Height Diameter Steel thickness t (mm)
(m) (mm) 2.65 3.00 3.75 4.25 4.75 6.35
40 300 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
36 415 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
32 530 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
(D.1) (D.2) 28 645 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
24 760 0.88 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
20 875 0.81 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
16 990 0.74 0.81 0.93 1.00 1.00 1.00
12 1105 0.69 0.75 0.87 0.94 1.00 1.00
8 1220 0.64 0.70 0.81 0.88 0.95 1.00
4 1335 0.60 0.66 0.77 0.83 0.89 1.00
0 1450 0.57 0.62 0.72 0.79 0.85 1.00
Local buckling mode (𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 > 170)
Local-distortional buckling interaction (120 < 𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 < 170)
Distortional buckling mode (𝐷𝐷/𝑡𝑡 < 120)
(E.1) (E.2)
Figure 8 Failure modes of the conic pole support with openings (1) and (2) (as
shown in figure 6), illustrating the von Mises stresses (failure criterion) and
Table 4 clearly indicates the cases for which the flexural strength is
deformed shape, for: (A) no reinforcement; (B) rectangular plate reinforcement; not affected by the buckling modes L and D and 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛 /𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 is equal to
(C) angle section reinforcement; (D) semi-circular corners reinforcement; (E) 1.0, corresponding to the elastic strength of not slender cross-
semi-circular corners plus rectangular plates reinforcements. sections. On the other hand, the results with 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛 /𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 < 1.0 show the
cases of slender cross-sections affected by local buckling. Actually,
all the cases of slender sections included in Table 4 are affected by
Both the American [12] and Brazilian [10] specifications associated local buckling (D mode is never dominant for the set of examined
to hot-rolled steel structures present guidelines for circular hollow cases), and Figure 3-(iii) illustrates the local buckling mode
structural sections (CHS), expressed in equation (2). Essentially, concerned in the present results.
these procedures take into account plastic flexural strength (𝑀𝑀𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 =
 Table 3 – Design guidelines considered in the present study, to predict the ultimate flexural strength of steel polygonal conic pole for antennas support.

Standard Description Slenderness factor 𝝀𝝀 Nominal flexural strength

𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝜆𝜆𝐿𝐿 ≤ 0.776

ABNT NBR 𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛,𝐿𝐿 = � 0.15 𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦

Cold-formed 𝜆𝜆𝐿𝐿 = � �1 − 0.8 � 0.8 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝜆𝜆𝐿𝐿 > 0.776
14762:2010 [9], 𝑀𝑀𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝜆𝜆𝐿𝐿 𝜆𝜆𝐿𝐿
steel (1)
AISI S100-2016
structural 𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝜆𝜆𝐷𝐷 ≤ 0.673
[11] and AS/NZS 𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦
members 𝜆𝜆𝐷𝐷 = �
4600-2018 [15] 𝑀𝑀𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛,𝐷𝐷 = � 0.22 𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦
�1 − � 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝜆𝜆𝐷𝐷 > 0.673
𝜆𝜆𝐷𝐷 𝜆𝜆𝐷𝐷

𝐷𝐷
𝜆𝜆 = 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 𝑍𝑍 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝜆𝜆 ≤ 𝜆𝜆𝑝𝑝
𝑡𝑡 ⎧
ABNT NBR
Circular 0.07 𝐸𝐸 ⎪
8800:2008 [10], 𝜆𝜆𝑝𝑝 =
hollow 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 ⎪ 0.021 𝐸𝐸
ANSI/AISC 360- � + 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 � 𝑆𝑆 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝜆𝜆𝑝𝑝 < 𝜆𝜆 ≤ 𝜆𝜆𝑟𝑟 (2)
structural 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛 = 𝐷𝐷�
2016 [12] and 0.31 𝐸𝐸 ⎨ 𝑡𝑡
sections 𝜆𝜆𝑟𝑟 =
ANSI/TIA-222-H- 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 ⎪ 0.33 𝐸𝐸
(CHS) ⎪ 𝑆𝑆 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝜆𝜆𝑟𝑟 < 𝜆𝜆 ≤ 𝜆𝜆𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙
2018 [13] 0.45 𝐸𝐸 ∗
𝐷𝐷�
𝜆𝜆𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 = ⎩ 𝑡𝑡
𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦

18-sided 𝑤𝑤 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 𝑆𝑆 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝜆𝜆 < 1,17

ANSI/TIA-222-G- polygonal 𝜆𝜆 = � � � (3)
𝑡𝑡 𝐸𝐸 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛 = 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦′ 𝑆𝑆 = �
2005 [14] tubular pole
1.404 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 [1,0 − 0.245 𝜆𝜆] 𝑆𝑆 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 1.17 ≤ 𝜆𝜆 ≤ 𝜆𝜆𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙
members 𝜆𝜆𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 = 2.14

18-sided 𝑤𝑤 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 1.27 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 𝑆𝑆 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝜆𝜆 < 0.759

ANSI/TIA-222-H- polygonal 𝜆𝜆 = � � � (4)
𝑡𝑡 𝐸𝐸 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛 = 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 ′ 𝑆𝑆 = �
2018 [13] tubular pole
1.560 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 [1.0 − 0.245 𝜆𝜆] 𝑆𝑆 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 0.759 ≤ 𝜆𝜆 ≤ 𝜆𝜆𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙
members 𝜆𝜆𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 = 2.14

* For the standard ANSI/TIA-222-H-2018 [13], related to CHS equation, the 𝜆𝜆𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 = 300, i.e. 𝐷𝐷 ⁄𝑡𝑡 ≤ 300.

Figure 9 shows the graphical representation of the results from 5.3 Wind loading
table 4 and it is quite clear the range of diameter-thickness
combination (𝐷𝐷-𝑡𝑡) affected or not by the local buckling: (i) the After the previous study of the buckling modes, the FEM nonlinear
plateau equal to 1.0 reveals the cases of not slender sections, with model revealing the effect of the openings, the definition of a set of
𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛 = 𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 , and (ii) the surface lower than 1.0 indicates the cases frame stiffeners around the openings, the identification of the
failure modes and the presentation of available design rules for the
polygonal steel member, the representative example of the
40𝑚𝑚 high pole was submitted to wind-induced loading obtained as
described in section 2. In addition to the basic gust wind speed 𝑉𝑉0
equal to 40𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠 (at 10𝑚𝑚 above ground level in flat and open terrain),
Mn/My
other scenarios were also considered: 30, 35 and 45𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠.
1.00
The factored load combination for strength follows the Brazilian
0.90
code [10] is 1.25𝑫𝑫 + 1.4𝑾𝑾, with 𝑫𝑫 as the dead load of the pole self-
0.80 weight and 𝑾𝑾 as the wind load, which allowed the computation of
6.35
0.70 the design bending moment 𝑀𝑀𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 . The dead load was neglected due
4.75
to insignificant effect in the load combination (lower than 2%).
0.60 4.25
3.75
0.50 5.4 Ultimate limit state (ULS) results
300

3.00
473

Plate
645
818

2.65 thickness t
990

The ULS for strength as stated in the Brazilian code [18] was
1163
1335

(mm)
Diameter D (mm)
Figure 9 Parametric results of the predicted flexural strength, 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛 /𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 , versus
plate thickness 𝑡𝑡 and diameter 𝐷𝐷 combination along the pole’s heigh, with the
flexural strength according with the DSM equation (1), (𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛 = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚(𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛,𝐿𝐿 , 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛,𝐷𝐷 )).
classified as thin-walled sections affected by local buckling, where
larger diameter 𝐷𝐷 combined with lower steel plate thickness 𝑡𝑡
produces more slender cross-sections and lower flexural strength.
considered in the present study. Initially, the 40 𝑚𝑚 high 20-sided
polygonal pole, with steel plate with thickness 𝑡𝑡 = 6.35 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 and 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 =
350 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀, was tested. In addition, the flexural bending moment due
to factored loads, 𝑀𝑀𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 , was calculated for the basic wind velocities of
30, 35, 40 and 45 𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠. According with the Brazilian code for the
design of CFS [7], the flexural strength resistance factor is 1.1 and
the design flexural strength is 𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 = 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛 ⁄1.1, which is in close
agreement with the LRFD rule of the North American standard [11],
with 𝑀𝑀𝑑𝑑 = 0.9𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 and 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 as the nominal strength obtained with
equation (1).
Figure 10 shows the results of the bending moment due to the wind
factored loads (𝑀𝑀𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 ), compared to the design flexural strength (𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 ).
In addition, the results of the FEM model are shown.
4500
MRd FEM
4000
MRd NBR 14762
3500 MSd: V0 = 45 m/s
Bending Moment [kN.m]
MSd: V0 = 40 m/s
3000
MSd: V0 = 35 m/s
2500 MSd: V0 = 30 m/s
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 10 20 30
Height [m]
Figure 10 Flexural strength given by the FEM analysis (𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹), ABNT NBR
14762:2010 [9] (𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 ) and the bending moment due to factored wind loads (𝑀𝑀𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 )
given by the Brazilian code ABNT NBR 6123:1988 [1], for different basic wind
velocities, considering the 20-sided polygonal conic pole, 40 𝑚𝑚 high, base
diameter of 1450𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 and top diameter of 300𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚, and steel plate with 𝑡𝑡 =
6.35 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 and 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 = 350 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀.
The results presented in Figure 10 reveals that the flexural strength
given by the Brazilian guideline [9] in equation (1) is in close
accordance with the results provided by the FEM analysis. Also, the
20-sided polygonal cross-section with 40 meters high and thickness
of 6.35 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 presents a safe design option for the case of basic wind
velocity up to 40 𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠. Note that for the basic wind velocity of
45 𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠, the pole structure does not meet the ULS safety verification.
Moreover, a sensibility study on the number of sides of the
polygonal cross-section was performed, by comparing the results
for 16, 18 and 20-sided, considering the same steel grade and the
available steel coil thickness of 2.65, 3.00, 3.75, 4.25, 4.75 and
6.35 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚. Figure 11 illustrates the results.
The first observation from Figure 11 is that the 20-sided conic pole
with 6.35𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 of thickness presents the best structural option. With
respect to the impact of the number of sides, it can be noticed that
for 16 and 18 sides and 𝑡𝑡 = 6.35 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚, it affects the flexural strength
in the initial (approximately) 3 meters from the ground level of the
18-sided and (approximately) 5 meters of the 16-sided pole. Indeed,
with lower number of sides, the polygonal flat walls are wider,
resulting in more slender cross-sections, enabling more pronounced
development of local or distortional buckling modes.
Concerning to the variation of thickness of the conic pole in Figure
11, it is clearly noticeable (as expected) that lower values of
thickness give the lower flexural strength. However, note that the
effect of the reduction of the thickness is more pronounced in the
first (approx.) 30 meters of the conic pole, region where the section
has higher slenderness. Next to the top of the conic pole, the
polygonal cross-section is less slender, which makes the reduction
of the thickness a valuable approach to reduce material
consumption.
One must observe that the results of Figure 11 are only valid for the
pole structure without any openings. As a consequence, reducing
the number of sides conducts to wider plane walls and the presence
of openings would promote more severe strength reduction than
described in session 4.2 for the case of 20-sided section. These
aspects should be considered for design purposes of improving the
structural solution, since the steel conic pole is far more limited in
presence of openings, specifically in the region next to the base.
3500
MSd
3000 6.35 mm (20 Lados)
sides
Bending Moment [kN.m]
6.35 mm (18 Lados)
sides
2500 sides
6.35 mm (16 Lados)
sides
4.75 mm (20 lados)
2000 sides
4.25 mm (20 lados)
sides
3.75 mm (20 lados)
1500 sides
3.00 mm (20 lados)
sides
2.65 mm (20 lados)
1000
500
0
0 10 20 30 40
Height (m)
Figure 11 Comparison between the design flexural strength 𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 and wind
40
induced design bending moment 𝑀𝑀𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 , considering the wind basic velocity of 𝑉𝑉0 =
40 𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠 for polygonal section of 20, 18 and 16 sides and steel thickness 𝑡𝑡 from
2.65 to 6.35 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚.
5.5 Additional design procedures
Figure 12 illustrates the comparison between the design procedures
shown in table 3 for the case of the 40 m high, 20-sided pole, 𝑡𝑡 =
6.35 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 and 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 = 350 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀. Additionally, the bending moment 𝑀𝑀𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆
of the factored wind loading of 𝑉𝑉0 = 40 𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠 is presented, along with
the FEM flexural strength results 𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 .
It can be seen in Figure 12 that clearly the plastic moment (𝑀𝑀𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 =
𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 𝑍𝑍/1.1) of the cross section provides much higher values than the
FEM solution, as well as for all the design procedures. Less slender
sections, close to the top of the pole, present flexural strength from
both FEM and codes results close to the plastic moment.
With respect to the round sections standards, i.e., ANSI/TIA-222-
H-2018 [13] and ABNT NBR 8800:2008 [10], it is observed that
both produced very close results. In fact, the two standards, are
based on the American standard ANSI/AISC 360-16 [12], and adopt
the same equations (equation (2)), with a slight difference in the
coefficient of resistance reduction.
Another relevant observation that should be highlighted is the
normative methodologies suggested by the standards ANSI/TIA-
222-G-2005 [14] and ANSI/TIA-222-H-2018 [13] for 18-sided
polygonal tubular sections. It is observed that the current North
American standard for telecommunication towers presents results
(equation (4)) closer to the DSM-based Brazilian standard ABNT
NBR 14762:2010 [9] procedure (equation (1)) for the region where
the cross section is more slender and local buckling strongly affects
the flexural strength. In addition, with the increase of the antenna
support height and, consequently, the decrease of the section
diameter and the slenderness of the cross section, the standard
ANSI/TIA-222-H-2018 [13] tends to be closer to the plastic
moment. To better visualize this phenomenon, in Figure 13 it is
possible to observe the comparison between the maximum
compressive stress for the extreme fiber. It can also be noted that
the procedures suggested by the standard ANSI/TIA-222-G-2005
[14] are more conservative than the procedures suggested by the
current standard ANSI/TIA-222-H-2018 [13], also reported by
Hawkins [19].
 MSd 5.6 Stiffened polygonal pole
MRd TIA-222-H-2018 Round
MRd TIA-222-G-2005 Poly 18 Sides Another important observation from the table 4 and Figure 9,
MRd NBR 14762:2010 CFS
reporting the flexural strength reduction for the slenderer cross-
MRd TIA-222-H-2018 Poly 18 Sides
sections, is the design option of inclusion intermediate stiffeners in
Mpl Plastic Moment fy*Z
FEM the polygonal walls, as illustrated in Figure 14. This structural
3500 conception was investigated and revealed this strategy may bring
advantages in certain conditions, as reported by Franco and Batista
3000 [20], for application on stiffened trapezoidal CFS roofing system.
Firstly, this alternative is only relevant for 𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 /𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 < 1.00, i.e.,
Bending Moment [kN.m]

2500 when the ULS is directly affected by the buckling effect and the
cross-section is classified as slender. In addition, although cold-
2000
forming manufacturing process for stiffened polygonal pole is
available, the connection solution for the case of slip joint
1500
alternative would have to be developed, in order to deliver a feasible
1000 solution for erection.

500
(i)
0
0 10 20 30 40
Height [m]

Figure 12 Design flexural moment due to factored loads (𝑀𝑀𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 ) and flexural (ii)
strength (𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 ) along the height, considering the standards of ABNT NBR
14762:2010 [9], ANSI/TIA-222-G-2005 [14] and ANSI/TIA-222-H-2018 [13].
Icosagonal conic support with 40 meters high, base diameter of 𝐷𝐷𝑏𝑏 = 1450𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
and top diameter of 𝐷𝐷𝑡𝑡 = 300𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚, thickness of 𝑡𝑡 = 6,35𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 and yielding of 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦 =
350𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀.
(iii)
From Figure 13, note that the procedures suggested by the Brazilian
standard ABNT NBR 14762:2010 [9] tends to be more conservative Figure 14 Example of intermediate stiffeners that are appropriate for cold-
formed polygonal cross-sections, modelled in the 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 [3]: (i) single 4-folds
when the section is more compact. In fact, for compact sections, i.e.,
(trapezoid) stiffener, (ii) single 3-folds (triangle) stiffener and (iii) double trapezoid
non-slender cross-sections, the design guidelines expressed by stiffeners per side face.
equations (2) and (4) has the flexural strength expressed by the
plastic moment (or increased by a factor). This gain in strength, 6 Final remarks
refereeing to the yield stress of the material, is attributed to the
ultimate limit state associated to the plastification of the full cross- The present study concluded the 20-sided conic steel CFS polygonal
section. pole is an appropriate structural option for antennas support as high
as 40m from the ground level. The results included the dynamic
effect of the wind and both ULS and SLS estimated structural
450 behavior follows internationally accepted safety principles. Even for
375 the case of slender cross-sections, with relevant presence of the
Maximum compressive stress of

local buckling, the flexural strength computation resulted in safe

the extreme fiber [MPa]

300 structural solution, respecting the ULS prescriptions of recognized

σSd
225 σRd TIA-222-G-2005 Round
σRd TIA-222-G-2005 Poly 18 Sides
150 σRd NBR 14762:2010 CFS
σRd TIA-222-H-2018 Poly 18 Sides
75 Mpl/S
FEM
0
0 10 20 30 40
Height [m]
Figure 13 Maximum compressive stress for the extreme fiber along the height of
the pole, considering the design guidelines: ABNT NBR 14762:2010 [9],
ANSI/TIA-222-G-2005 [14] and ANSI/TIA-222-H-2018 [13] .
An interesting observation can be retrieved from the Figure 13. The
maximum compressive stress for the extreme fiber due to factored
loads (𝜎𝜎𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 ) in the first 25 meters of the conic pole, remains almost
constant (average of 300 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀, standard deviation of 6 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 and
coefficient of variation of 2%). Therefore, there is basically a
condition of uniform normal stress in the most compressed fiber.
This assumption supports the idea that the present finite element
model is most probably in accordance to the real stress distribution
provided by the equivalent static loading provided by the wind-
induced dynamic behavior. Because, the present FEM uses the
hypothesis that the maximum compressive stress at the extreme
fiber is equal in both ends.
design standards.
Other buckling modes condition can be considered, as distortional
and local-distortional interaction, and this aspect was revealed with
the help of the finite strip method-based computational tool 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹
(Finite Strip Computer Application). From the point of view of
buckling analysis, this software proved to be able to obtain accurate
required results for design procedures.
The investigation obtained results for other than 20-sided CFS
shapes, combined with variation of the steel plate thickness and
wind loading. The choice of the most refined and appropriate
solution is obviously dependent of each particular project, as the
local wind condition, the steel grade (the higher the yielding stress
the slenderer the structure), the structure geometry (number of
sides, diameter, thickness and conicity), the antennas geometry and
distribution, as well as the geometry and distribution of the
openings. Anyway, the reported results are aimed at giving
consistent theoretically based directions for the development of
improved structural design of polygonal poles for antennas support.
With respect to the design guidelines, it was found that the Brazilian
code for CFS structures [9] tend to be more conservative for more
compact sections, and this is explained by the fact that CFS are
usually thin-walled, designed for elastic ULS. For slender sections,
the referred code showed close agreement with the Finite Element
Method results of the flexural bending strength. Analogous results
were obtained with the North-American standard [13], on the basis
of 18-sided polygonal tubular sections.
Moreover, the design guidelines for tubular sections (CHS) are
conservative when applied to 20-sided polygonal cross-sections.
This is the case of the recommendation found in the ANSI/TIA-222-
H-2018 [13], for polygonal cross-sections with number of sides
higher than 18.
Further investigation on the DSM-based design procedure
considering the plastic flexural strength of the cross-section, might
be a promising approach for safety design of 20-sided (or higher
number of sides) polygonal conic poles. Also, the authors presume
that the adoption of intermediate stiffeners, for thinner plates
and/or higher yield stress of steel, may increase the strength
capacity of the conic poles, without need of increasing the number
of sides and/or the thickness of the conic support. Additionally, the
adoption of intermediate stiffeners next to openings can be a
valuable approach in order to prevent localized buckling.
The study also considered the effect of combined bending, shear,
axial and torsional loading condition, as well as the interaction
between all of them for ULS computation. The results (not reported
here) proved the bending effect promoted by the wind forces is the
most important by far (approximately, axial, shear and torsional
combined contribution is less than 3%).
Finally, although the fatigue was not considered in the present
study, the authors are aware that this is a main topic to be included
in structural design, with special emphasis for the welded details of
the openings and the base connection of the pole with the
foundation concrete block.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge BrasilSat Harald S/A for the
cooperation with the COPPE’s research group, that allowed the
development of the present study. The third author would like to
thank the research agency Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento
Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), grant # 141287/2019-5.
References
[1] ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE NORMAS TÉCNICAS, NBR
6123:1988 - Forças devidas ao vento em edificações, Rio de
Janeiro, Brasil, 1988.
[2] COMITE EUROPEEN DE NORMALISATION- CEN, Eurocode 1:
Actions on structures - Part 1-4: General actions - Wind actions,
EN 1991-1-4:2005, 2005.
[3] J.A. Lazzari, E.M. Batista, Finite strip method computer application
for buckling analysis of thin-walled structures with arbitrary
cross-sections, REM - Int. Eng. Journal. 74 (2021).
https://doi.org/10.1590/0370-44672020740065.
[4] R. Bebiano, D. Camotim, R. Gonçalves, GBTul 2.0 − A second-
generation code for the GBT-based buckling and vibration
analysis of thin-walled members, Thin-Walled Struct. 124 (2018)
235–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TWS.2017.12.002.
[5] ANSYS Inc, ANSYS Mechanical APDL Theory Reference,
Canonsburg, PA, 2013.
[6] M.A. Crisfield, A fast incremental/iterative solution procedure
that handles ‘snap-through,’ in: Comput. Methods Nonlinear
Struct. Solid Mech., Elsevier, 1981: pp. 55–62.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-027299-3.50009-1.
[7] J. Chen, J.-Y. Zhu, T.-M. Chan, Experimental and numerical
investigation on stub column behaviour of cold-formed octagonal
hollow sections, Eng. Struct. 214 (2020) 110669.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110669.
[8] E. Ellobody, B. Young, Behavior of Cold-Formed Steel Plain Angle
Columns, J. Struct. Eng. 131 (2005) 457–466.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2005)131:3(457).
[9] ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE NORMAS TÉCNICAS, NBR
14762:2010 - Dimensionamento de estruturas de aço
constituídas por perfis formados a frio, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil,
2010.
[10] ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE NORMAS TÉCNICAS, NBR
8800:2008 - Projeto de estruturas de aço e de estruturas mistas
de aço e concreto de edifícios, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil, 2008.
[11] AMERICAN IRON AND STEEL INSTITUTE, S100-16 - North
American Specification for the Design of Cold-Formed Steel
Structural Members, Arlington, EUA, 2016.
[12] AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION, ANSI/AISC
360-16 - Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, Arlington,
EUA, 2016.
[13] TELECOMMUNICATION INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, ANSI/TIA-
222-H - Structural Standard for Antenna Supporting Structures
and Antennas and Small Wind Turbine Support Structures,
Arlington, USA, 2018.
[14] TELECOMMUNICATION INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, ANSI/TIA-
222-G-2005 - Structural Standard for Antenna Supporting
Structures and Antennas and Small Wind Turbine Support
Structures, Arlington, USA, 2005.
[15] AUSTRALIAN/NEW ZEALAND STANDARD, AS/NZS 4600 -
Cold-formed steel structures, Sydney, Australia, 2018.
[16] B.W. Schafer, T. Peköz, Direct strength prediction of cold-formed
steel members using numerical elastic buckling solutions, in: Int.
Spec. Conf. Cold-Formed Steel Struct. Recent Res. Dev. Cold-
Formed Steel Des. Constr., 1998.
[17] G.J. Hancock, Y.B. Kwon, E. Stefan Bernard, Strength design
curves for thin-walled sections undergoing distortional buckling,
J. Constr. Steel Res. 31 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1016/0143-
974X(94)90009-4.
[18] S. Timoshenko, J.M. Gere, Theory of elastic stability, 2nd ed.,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1963.
[19] D.W. Hawkins, Discussion of current issues related to steel
telecommunications monopole structures, in: ASCE (Ed.), Struct.
Congr. 2010, ASCE, 2010: pp. 2417–2438.
https://doi.org/10.1061/41130(369)219.
[20] J.M.S. Franco, E. de M. Batista, Buckling behavior and strength of
thin-walled stiffened trapezoidal CFS under flexural bending,
Thin-Walled Struct. 117 (2017) 268–281.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TWS.2016.11.027.